This was a scheduled sale. It's not clear to me what the SEC is seeking to investigate. Breaking a scheduled sale to take a loss is also illegal insider trading.
Actually it might be legal. Which doesn't make sense, because trading or not trading based on insider info has the same effective impact on the market, but it may not be 'insider trading' if you decide not to trade.
'After Rule 10b5-1 was enacted, the SEC staff publicly took the position that canceling a planned trade made under the safe harbor does not constitute insider trading, even if the person was aware of the inside information when canceling the trade.'
It doesn't seem like Krzanich falls under this though because he went through with the sale.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SEC_Rule_10b5-1#A_possible_loo...
2. >Breaking a scheduled sale to take a loss is also illegal insider trading.
Source? I don't think this is correct - it is illegal to insider trade but not to refrain from trading. See e.g. https://www.statnews.com/2016/08/08/insider-trading-biotech/
Regarding the second point, yes it's a grey area. Refraining to trade when the trade is part of a scheduled plan in order to avoid a loss is insider trading if you have privileged information. In principle refraining to trade in general is probably illegal, but I admit that's a murkier area.
Do you have a source for your first claim that cancelling to avoid a loss is insider trading?
Yes: https://www.sec.gov/rules/final/33-7881.htm.
The purpose of a prearranged stock plan is that it's autonomous and outside the control of insiders with privileged, confidential information. Making any decision with regards to the plan once it has been adopted, either to trade or not to trade, voids that autonomy.
I don't see where they ban refraining from trading.
Because the WaPo article linked to is about insider trading.
http://www.forexlive.com/news/!/intel-ceo-reportedly-sold-39...